dante’s inferno revisited, 2020
Dante’s Inferno is one of few remaining fourteenth century literary works that remain in the public consciousness, at least in name. The ancient gossip column could have appeared in the New York Star beside Carrie Bradshaw’s equally famed Sex and the City, yet remains integral to the Catholic canon. Although acknowledged to be a work of imaginative fiction, this piece is the origin of many concepts that have since found their way into the canonical imagination, not limited to, theological, scriptural, and allegorical references or imagery, most of which remain in use today. There is still such dialectical conjecture as to the level of its Biblical accuracy; even so, it is often touted as a literal journey through the afterlife, and by many modern Christians, the themes are referenced canonically without admittance of its origins, which may be considered somewhat embarrassing.
One of the most extensive sources of modern embarrassment felt in Inferno-- and in the Divine Comedy, the trilogy of epics to which it belongs -- lies, in fact, in Alighieri’s positions as an Italian poet of the time, and his position within the Church, or lack thereof. Though he was a scholar and was quite well-versed in philosophy and theology, this text, and its subsequent companions Purgatorio and Paradiso, are written with absolutely no Biblical or theological basis. Physical descriptors Alighieri includes range widely; he describes Hell as nine concentric circles that lie within the earth (i.e. one for each level of sin) and goes on to describe these contrasting circles at great length. The first circle is for the unbaptized and any pagans that remained virtuous, the second is for the adulterous and lustful, and so on and so forth until the ninth circle-- where those who have committed treason reside. Each circle is described to be wildly different, from suicide victims becoming trees -- which is an embarrassing enough claim on its own -- to bloody trenches full of “blasphemers” and “sodomites” (Alighieri). All the circles, and all his imagery in general share an important characteristic in common: they are never found any support in the Bible. This great contrast to the teachings of Catholicism is one of the largest hypocrisies of the Christian theological canon. Not only did Alighieri lack the credentials to write conclusively about such concepts in this way, he did so without consulting what has been referred to as an “authoritative and fixed canon” or “commenting on earlier Biblical texts or using existing fixed texts to support a particular position” (Najman 146). As the concept of the “circles of Hell” has become public knowledge, and as such become somewhat integrated into the canon, it becomes increasingly embarrassing to note that those concepts were intended to be completely fictional and remain impartial to any preexisting ideas within the Church.
Although it may be far more tempting to depict Hell in Dante’s level of dramatic imagery, the actual canon is far less conclusive, and as such the contrast holds a certain level of shame. According to the Church, Heaven is an eternal connection with God, whereas Hell can only be described as total separation from Him; canonically, anything that attempts to clarify further is nothing but speculation, yet many still subscribe to the embarrassing notion of great lakes of fire and pain that Alighieri put forth (Alighieri). Another instance of embarrassment is not simply involved with the ‘where’ and ‘what’ of Inferno, but rather with its ‘who’ and ‘when’. In revisiting the text within a greater historical context, there is a realization of all the factors at play that led to great changes in the theological landscape in the decades following its publication. Many deliberate choices in writing Inferno led to the text gaining an unintentional use as Protestant, anti-Catholic propaganda in the 16th century Reformation period. Alighieri’s placement of high Catholic officials in various circles throughout Hell was not only a highly controversial choice at the time of its publication, but one that was taken advantage of anachronistically and turned into something more religious than political (Staggs 9). Although it was incredibly vindictive of Alighieri to write so maliciously of many of his contemporaries in the first place -- enough so that it would have gained him a place in his self-proclaimed Fifth Circle -- that hypocrisy has grown to become a vivid source of embarrassment today. Essentially, reexamination today of his derogatory comments towards historical figures would, in the eyes of many Christians, become quite embarrassing and discredit some of his commentary upon the state of theological Many of the characters he meets in his journey through Hell held varying levels of historical and religious significance, and as such, made bold statements that turned to embarrassment as the text aged and was appropriated by others for repurposing or reframing (Rupers 34).
In the spirit of reframing, embarrassment is sourced also in the approach taken which paints the ways in which Hell becomes a place of eternal punishment. The story of Adam and Eve is so closely tied with sin in the canon; Adam and Eve chose to disobey the word of the “Lord” and ate the fruit of forbidden tree, although the eternal environment has remained constant, the Garden of Eden, the “eternal heaven” became hell for them; they craved for clothes to cover up their naked body and their humanistic desire dragged them into the deeper darkness. Despite this clear connection, Dante does not even afford them any mention in Inferno, directly opposing Biblical description of sin and punishment, and rather makes mention only in the second of the three epic poems: Purgatorio.
Opposingly, those who do actually afford themselves a place in the circles of Hell are given highly unorthodox punishments, which have absolutely no Biblical evidence to stand on. Also, contrasting to modern views, punishment stand directly in tandem with the sin itself rather than the damage it causes; by this logic, horrifyingly, one who commits manslaughter, or unintentional murder, would at the very least find themselves in purgatory instead of Hell should their intentions have been pure, which absolves them of such sin and leaves only the inadvertent taking of life (Segal 247). Punishments, when the crime itself is severe enough, may include bathing in blood, violently strong winds that prevent rest, being stretched onto burning sands and pelted with fire, or, as previously mentioned, men turning into sticks and trees in cases of suicide, which he refers to as “harm against the self” (Alighieri). In today’s contemporary understanding of and sensitivity to these subjects, especially those of self-harm or self-murder, such a form of eternal torture is highly embarrassing and even shameful.
These many forms of embarrassment in Alighieri’s epic poem, one that is otherwise considered to be of the greatest caliber, are confronted in many ways today, overcompensating for the refusal to acknowledge that something to deeply integrated into public knowledge is in fact not a truly Christian text, despite being written by someone so knowledgeable about Christian theological philosophy and Biblical history. Today’s historians and scholars go on to detail the picture Inferno paints as a “disordered Hell”, one they feel equipped to condemn (Hell as an Allegorical Contrast…, 12). The reality of the matter remains that the nine circles Alighieri spends so many pages painstakingly describing are actually some of the most order and outline-driven depictions of Hell offered in Christian writings, and as such, any teachings that oppose this are based in a need to condemn this piece rather than examine it impartially.
Embarrassment can skew these perceptions, especially from devout Christians, which proves the ways in which Inferno’s background can go both ways in its representation today.
Another exemplary depiction of the reinterpretations of Inferno as analogous to the greater contexts within which it is being examined is artists who have created visual interpretations of the text, under a wide range of predispositions and ideologies. Films, artworks, architectural pieces, sculpture art, animations, digital works, and even advertising campaigns have all made references to Alighieri’s extensive poems, all in their own unique way. These works range from contemporary pieces at the time of Inferno’s publication, to modern projects that came to fruition in the last decade. Although many of these works stuck to the depictions of Hell as presented originally by Alighieri (thus further cementing the presentation of these ideas of Hell to the canon), some of the works strayed significantly in all directions, causing a means by which to interpret many different areas of life through the lens of this canon and Alighieri’s ideas at large.
One of the more prominent examples of these alternative depictions are built off of Franz von Bayros’s erotic depictions of Alighieri’s text; by incorporating these alternative themes that had insofar not been explored at length, von Bayros offered additions to the newly-canonical world that many may have considered embarrassing immediately, even at the time of von Bayros’s pieces being made in 1921. His depictions of phallic imagery were directly tied to Alighieri’s descriptors of the second circle of Hell, which dealt with lust; despite this, a discomfort felt in relation to these matters exceeded any worth the works held, and thus they were overlooked for the most part (Knudde, 7). Although Alighieri did directly confront and discuss the concepts of lust and adultery throughout the text, even exploring it in the contemporary illustrations which were released, it is impossible to say if they hold the same intentions or even come across the same way as von Bayros’s illustrations due today. Such highly socially contextualized images are a toast to an eternally changing social landscape and a testament to the embarrassment so closely tied to this form of sin. The eroticism inherent in von Bayros’s images may cause a further skewed perception of what Alighieri would have considered canonical in his own work, and is up for further interpretation based on the inclusivity of descriptors throughout the second circle of Hell in Inferno.
Another set of visual depictions often given the utmost importance are the film interpretations of the Divine Comedy. There have been a number of film adaptations since Giuseppe di Liguoro’s silent film version created in 1911, and each has given a highly unique edition of Alighieri’s story, but all of them also took some (often embarrassing liberties) to recreate the afterlife and the underworld in the director’s individualized image. None of them, despite making it clear that they consider Inferno to be a Christian canonical piece, actually remain true to descriptors in the text, often due to technical limitations that restrict the ability to fulfill conditions of lakes of fire and total darkness envisioned in the text itself (Alighieri). Some other changes made, though, clearly remain unrelated to the physical limitations on part of the directors, and rather were edits and careful choices born from an acute embarrassment and directorial need to correct the facets of the text which were seen as embarrassing. Some changes were so drastic that stylistic choices concluded in the creation of an actual comedy or animated short films, both of which functioned as tools to adjust themes of the Divine Comedy to something far more palatable to modern viewers.
The concept of “retroactive continuity” is one deeply rooted in the reinterpretation of embarrassing themes, and has seen greatly increased use in the past years. It deals with the reimposition of modern or revised themes upon a previously canonized work, and although many dislike this disembodied application of the continuation of logic, it is also seen as the immediate descendant of a culture that no longer subscribes to a given set philosophy, which was once canonized but may no longer be so widely accepted. In the examples set by films which posthumously adjust Alighieri’s outlook and messages, the spirit of retroactive continuity is fuelled through addition, alteration, or even intentional ignorance of these original messages in some cases.
Although uses of retroactive continuity may be used, sparingly, to incorporate things that were actually canonized on part of the Christian church, or to alleviate plot holes and the occasional inconsistencies, they were more often than not irrelevant to these past facets, and rather completely fuelled by forward-thinking mentalities or opinions that wholly skewed the original epic poems’ intent and meaning. On the larger scale, retroactively continuous narratives, being sourced in embarrassment, do not fulfill their natural and original purpose, and as such do far more damage than repair to stories that could stand on their own within Alighieri’s canon, even when making modern readers uncomfortable.
Holistically, Inferno, and the Divine Comedy epic poems at large, were a representation of the afterlife for Christians who were afforded no such descriptors in the Bible, and were in pursuit of a text believable enough to incorporate into their worldviews, even if it meant the degradation of a certain integrity of the current canon, resulting in embarrassment for future Christians, historians, and the general public to which knowledge of this text was committed. Alighieri looked at sin, punishment, and the little information available about Hell, and formed a cruelly depersonalized version of the underworld and its components. He formed narratives that became incredibly destructive to his contemporary creators, especially those in the Catholic Church at the time, and bastardized any depictions of the Church in a way that politicized and criticized its current state of affairs.
The forms of media sourced from Alighieri’s decisive and extensive texts became so rooted in public consciousness that it became difficult to dispute that these ideas were not tied to Christianity and to the Church itself, even when it was unintentional. As it became clearer and clearer that Alighieri’s ideas were becoming distanced from his original intentions (as during the Protestant Reformation), writers, politicians, literate citizens, anyone familiar with his work began to afford it as a vessel to convey their own conceptualizations about what could or should be canonical, or even what statements the poet himself was trying to make. In building such a vast world, he created an environment within which he could later discredit himself through the interpretations and mutilations of his text by others. Although extensive discourse upon the writings have been carried out, it is clear that they will continue to be reconsidered among the plethora of information available, and repainted in relation to the ever-changing body of artistic interpretations upon them that is available to the public.
Met with the highly exclusive, Biblically-specific world of canon that was steadfastly in place when Dante Alighieri began to write The Divine Comedy, and specifically Inferno, it seems natural that there would be a certain level of embarrassing themes as a result of its predecessors and the environment in which it was produced. Even as such, it remains one of the most monumental epic poems of all time, holding a place for the creation of what would become theological canon regardless of its questionable origins and inspiration. Alighieri approached Inferno with the decision to rethink the Christian dichotomy of Heaven and Hell, and in the spirit of this endeavor, all reinterpretations of the work since then have attempted to introduce unique angles to the renewed canon, leaving room for the retroactive continuity meant to correct Alighieri’s original path where seen fit. All things considered, the fascinating epic retains its original importance, and the canon built into it (even if manufactured) remains a testament to the diversity possible in theological discourse, when given the freedom to employ speculation, and the ability to suspend both disbelief and embarrassment, in the name of a more wholly concrete religious canon, to be built on for years to come.